ArticleScientific reports2026
Effect of geotextile on ballast fouling under cyclic loading in seasonal freeze-thaw conditions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ballast fouling during spring thaw is a recurrent challenge in seasonally frozen regions and can seriously compromise track stability. This study combined one-dimensional freeze-thaw cycling and cyclic loading model tests to investigate moisture-driven deterioration at the ballast-subgrade interface and the mitigation effect of geotextile separation. Freeze-thaw cycling under a top-down thermal gradient drove upward moisture migration, forming a moisture-enriched upper soil zone. Based on the post-cycling water-content profiles, representative upper-layer water contents were selected to simulate progressively wetter spring-thaw conditions in cyclic loading tests on ballast-silty clay specimens. The results showed depth-dependent pore-pressure responses and staged water migration, with persistent upward seepage in the upper zone and limited movement in the lower zone. Geotextile installation reduced pore pressure in the lower layer and weakened the upper-zone hydraulic gradient, but also delayed pore-pressure dissipation near the interface, resulting in higher residual pore pressure in the top layer at the end of loading. The final difference between reinforced and unreinforced specimens increased from 4.2 to 20.1 kPa as the upper-layer water content increased from 22% to 34%, while the geotextile reduced the final volumetric water content in the top layer by 1.9%-4.7%. Post-test observations and layered sieve analyses showed that higher moisture intensified ballast penetration and fine intrusion in unreinforced specimens, whereas the geotextile prevented silty clay intrusion and largely preserved the initial ballast gradation. Overall, geotextile separation mitigated spring-thaw-induced interface degradation by suppressing fine migration while altering the interfacial hydraulic response.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.